SMT .ASHARANI,MUKTSAR vs. THE INCOME TAX OFFICER, MUKTSAR

PDF · subscribers
ITA 62/ASR/2017Status: DisposedITAT Amritsar06 February 2020AY 2010-113 pages
AI SummaryDismissed

What did the Tribunal hold?

The Tribunal held that the appeal filed before it was not maintainable as it was filed in the name of the deceased assessee. The Tribunal dismissed the appeal but granted liberty to the assessee's legal heir to file a fresh appeal after rectifying the CIT(A)'s order to include the proper legal heirs.

What were the facts?

The assessee, Smt. Asha Rani, had expired before the CIT(A) passed the order. The appeal was filed before the ITAT by her legal heir, but the appeal was barred by limitation. The ITAT noted that the CIT(A)'s order was passed after the assessee's death and this fact was not brought to the CIT(A)'s notice.

What were the issues?

Maintainability of an appeal filed in the name of a deceased assessee and the procedural defect arising from an order passed after the assessee's death.

AI-generated summary — verify with the full judgment below

Income Tax Appellate Tribunal, AMRITSAR BENCH AMRITSAR

Before: SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM

Hearing: 05/02/2020Pronounced: 07/02/2020

आयकर अऩीऱीय अधधकरण, अमृतसर न्यायऩीठ, अमृतसर IN THE INCOME TAX APPELLATE TRIBUNAL AMRITSAR BENCH AMRITSAR BEFORE SHRI L.P. SAHU, AM & SHRI RAVISH SOOD, JM आयकर अऩीऱ सं./ (ननधाारण वषा / Assessment Year :2010-2011) Smt. Asha Rani, Vs. ITO, Muktsar Through L/H Hari Singh, Chak Bir Sarkar, Dist:Muktsar स्थायी ऱेखा सं./ PANNo. : AMTPR 5231 P (अऩीऱाथी /Appellant) .. (प्रत्यथी / Respondent) ननधााररती की ओर से /Assessee by : Shri Gaurav Dhall, AR राजस्व की ओर से /Revenue by : Shri Charan Dass, DR सुनवाई की तारीख / Date of Hearing : 05/02/2020 घोषणा की तारीख/Date of Pronouncement : 07/02/2020 आदेश / O R D E R Per L.P.Sahu, AM:

This is an appeal filed by the assessee against the order of CIT(A), Bathinda, dated 27.08.2014.

2.

At the outset, during the course of hearing, submitted an application for condonation of delay along with affidavit and submitted that assessee-Smt. Asha Rani has expired on 10.11.2013 and he produced evidence in this regard, therefore, the appeal of the assessee has been barred by limitation.

3.

On perusal of the appeal record of the Tribunal, we find that the application for condonation of delay was filed on 28.01.2017 and the appeal was filed before the Tribunal on 30.01.2017. It is also found Form No.36 filed before the Tribunal has been signed by the assessee on 12.04.2016.

4.

On further perusal of the order of CIT(A), we also noted that the CIT(A) has passed order on 27.08.2014, which is much after the death of assessee-Smt. Asha Rani (i.e. 10.11.2013) and this fact was also not brought on record by the assessee during the course of proceedings before him. Therefore, as per our considered opinion, the order passed by the CIT(A) is treated as defect due to the fault on the part of the assessee. Before the Tribunal, the assessee has filed Form No.36 in the capacity of legal heir of assessee putting the name of Shri Hari Singh. Therefore, at this stage, the second appeal filed before us is not maintainable. Accordingly, we dismiss the appeal of the assessee and direct the assessee to file an application before the CIT(A) for correction in the name of assessee mentioned in the cause title of the CIT(A)’s order by bringing proper legal heirs on record. The assessee is also at liberty to file appeal before the Tribunal after getting the corrected the name of assessee by substituting the proper legal heirs of the assessee. It is also clarified that other part of the order of CIT(A) would remain unchanged.

Recent GST High Court judgments

Search GST case law →